Path: csiph.com!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news2.arglkargh.de!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!news.spin.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python
Subject: Re: so you want to migrate DPMT/PAPT to git? look at what pgk-perl did!
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2015 15:40:03 +0200
Message-ID: <pUQ2n-Ty-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <pUqUi-6vT-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <pUCC6-6KD-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <pUNea-5gC-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <pUPIZ-x3-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <sandro.tosi@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 53
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:7159

> As someone who would really like to see the transition just get done, I find
> having this conversation now VERY frustrating.  This has been discussed for
> literally more than a year including at a session at the last Debconf.
>
> When we were discussing git-dpm, I don't recall you objecting.

I'm doing it now

>  To wait until
> the moment we are ready to pull the trigger on the migration

are we? when was the last update on it? from an external pov, there's
not much happening on the matter

> and demand we
> stop and reconsider the entire plan certainly feels like some kind of denial
> of service attack, even if you don't intend it this way.

'demand', 'denial of service attack'? I think you should re-read what
you wrote before sending it. While I can understand why you want to
exaggerate what I said, those are kinda strong words, even if sent
towards an hostile team participant.

> There comes a point where I think the team should be able to say "the time for
> this conversation was ____ e.g. last year" and we're going to proceed.

ok, can you define the 'team' then? and how it can decide when the time is up?

> Personally, I'm pretty much a git neophyte, but I find git-dpm trivially easy
> to use and it has the property, which I think is essential, of producing
> packages for upload that have patches in debian/patches that are logically
> separated.  I think it's essential because I don't think that one should have
> to refer back to a team VCS when trying to understand how to fix a package
> later (e.g. a security update). [note: I've no idea what other tools do or
> don't do this, I'm just saying this is an attribute of git-dpm that I find
> critical to any solution].
>
> How many times should we rediscuss everything before doing this?

talking about the 'patch regime' and a tool to codify our workflow
(which is completely unrelated to the migration) is kinda far away
from 'everything'.

-- 
Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAB4XWXz9xdxayYhQ3uTkZQTZfTU7dabvn0Asq3htGcFG8nAD8A@mail.gmail.com